Nov 25 2011, 10:14 PM
I support this action. As long as the countries in NATO are pro-freedom and democracy and the US isn't taking up everyone's slack then let's strengthen our presence in the global community and send a strong message to totalitarian and other oppressive regimes
Nov 26 2011, 09:32 PM
''NATO should only exist to keep peace, not taking part in some war but protect Nato Civilan, NATO are funded buy NATO Countries' tax payers and tax payers do not want war, so why are NATO at War but Politicians, War cost human lifes and cost decades of hate among angry relatives of the dead!?
War in the long run will bring ruin and unaccountable losses!?
No profit could replace precious lifes and those in charge alt to see from the views of the common people. A;; sins should be address like those Nazi.''
Originally Posted by Albert Di Salvo
Nov 28 2011, 05:36 AM
I Think Not
I've been in the military for 11 years and if you think NATO is a great market for us, you really need to think again and I'm going to give you great examples:
Originally Posted by MaxRiga
1) After Afghanistan in 2002, when my unit returned to the states, B Co 1/1 USMC, Camp Horno, CA; we were told we can no longer sharpen bayonets, use led ammunition, and we needed to not look as mean as we did because NATO said so.
2) Iraq, Oct 2003, NATO said that the Iraqis were now allowed to carry AK 47's, RPG's and any other type of weapon. NATO stated we had to literally walk up to these people, get a weapons card from them to make sure they had the right to carry said weapon. You are not allowed to point any weapon at them and you must try all efforts to win their hearts and minds. How would that make you feel to be in that situation? Pesronally, my guys and I felt beyond nervous and started asking why we were even in such a conflict.
3) Iraq Apr 2010 - Oct 2010, due to my injury sustained on Oct 3rd of last year, I was sent back to the states. We were mortared numerous times and even though we knew where the mortars came from and who was doing it, NATO said we are not allowed to engage them. They also started checking our Identification Cards when we entered Baghdad, even though most of our convoy was out on the streets where there are IED's (Improvised Explosive Devices) along the roadside. NATO thought there was nothing to be afraid of and we therefore had to be even more on alert, even though we knew we couldn't engage unless we literally saw the person setting off the IED. However, we in the military do know that most of them are wire detonated, or like a sliding door at WalMart, they have a system that when a certain number of vehicles cross, it is set to go off; yes, they have something that penetrates our armor and will literally kill eveyone inside our vehicle, hence how we lost a few people last year.
Again, if you think NATO is good, check this out and then ask any other Vet since VIETNAM and they'll tell you the same thing; THEY ARE A LOST CAUSE AND WE NEED TO GET AWAY FROM THEM AND THE U.N.
Dec 08 2011, 09:34 PM
Nato is good for escaping resonsiblility for atrocities that happen as a function of military actions against other nations.
Originally Posted by C.Fox
It gives an air of respectability when nato is onboard as well.
If Nato would have cooperated with Iraq Invasion II there would not have been the universal condemnation and loss of international respect that there was.
I get your complaints about trying to do ones Job in Iraq with such restrictions.
The biggest complaint that I have is that there was no legitimate reason given for being there in the first place and that Iraq is more of a threat to the US now than it was prior to the occupation.
Last edited by Giftedone; Dec 08 2011 at 09:35 PM.
Tags for this Thread